High existence and the "New Agey" Bias

 LeWiZa (@zpeialel)7 years, 4 months ago

So it has been awhile since I’ve posted and felt like I should join the fun again. However, I don’t believe many of you will enjoy my post. To me it seems like this website has became very “new agey”, there seems to be no balance to this. Before there was a diverse topic of posts and the different minds would offer different opinions and rebuttals to posts and topics. Now, however it’s seems this site has become “emotionally” heavy. Which to me defines the new age movement, a heavy reliance on emotional decision making and intuition. Which actually isn’t necessarily a bad thing, however a balance of logic/reasoning and intuition/emotion is a better mind set for a successful well balanced being. Excessive reason and logical thinking got us into the conundrum that marks this era, but excessive emotional and intuitive thinking won’t be the answer. It will be part of the solution, but not the solution in itself.

It’s essentially trading one extreme for another, extremes generally don’t create long term sustainable solutions. The only reason I am posting this is too present a view to all of those who enjoy this site. That there is a reason there is two types of thinking. They should both be used, and oh yeah, don’t get too sucked into the “new age” movement. If you want to identify with a movement, be part of the New Age movement, one marked by emotionally intelligent, rational beings who use all tools at their disposal, while constantly looking to refine their tool kit in order to develop themselves into gods (this post considers only a minor section of the tool kit-rational analytics and emotional/intuitive “thinking”-it’s not the right word but it’s the closest, I could say feeling but I don’t believe that covers it either).

That’s my two cents. Consider it, debate it, discard it, I don’t care, it’s meant as food for thought if you wish to consume it. Hopefully no indigestion ensues. Oh and if my language presents a logic/reasoning bias, you’d likely be correct but that does not entail I am not working on developing my emotional and intuitive intelligence further.

February 19, 2014 at 8:38 am
Anonymous (107) (@) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I don’t know how it used to be, but it seems like this is a place to introduce people to a more passionate lifestyle and then learn to pursue it rationally elsewhere.

[Hidden]
MonkeyZazu (1,865)M (@monkeyzazu) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I think your spot on with the importance of maintaining a balance, but I don’t see HE as being completely to one extreme though. I actually consider HE as being very balanced between a logical/reasoning condition and an intuitive/emotional one, mixing between the two quite nicely. Personally, I find that it satisfies my philosophical/deep thinking side and my new agey/spiritual sides very sufficiently.

I’ve been to a couple of sites that maintain that intuitive/emotional extreme. One example is http://spiritualnetworks.com/. If you wanna see a site all about new age spirituality, go there :) You’ll soon see the difference between it and HE :) And there’s nothing wrong with that. I have nothing bad to say about spiritual networks. It just doesn’t satisfy my philosophical needs. One thing that it does kind of triumph HE over is how much love there is. Place is filled with it. I have yet to see people arguing over petty disputes or views on things. Everyone’s very accepting.

[Hidden]
who (557) (@season) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

HE is a fantastic gateway at times. The nuts and bolts is better discussed on those types of sites, in my experience.

[Hidden]
gazsha (9) (@gazsha) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

Again I’m only new to the site, so I can’t say how it has changed. I can say though that coming from a scientific background and an interest in philosophy, I found HE to have and still have a great balance among the two. The people who are on here and comment in the discussions are well articulated, intelligent beings with their own views and opinions, yet open to suggestion which I like. Perhaps if you have been on HE for a while, it has become stagnant for you? For me it is the opposite.

[Hidden]
gazsha (9) (@gazsha) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I’m only new to the site, so I can’t say how it has changed. I can say though that coming from a scientific background and an interest in philosophy, I found HE to have and still have a great balance among the two. The people who are on here and comment in the discussions are well articulated, intelligent beings with their own views and opinions, yet open to suggestion which I like. Perhaps if you have been on HE for a while, it has become stagnant for you? For me it is the opposite.

[Hidden]
Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

The thing is, this is how fora work.
An internet forum today is just like the fora of ancient days.

It starts out a bit obscure, with few participants who are all roughly on the same page. And generally speaking, intelligent.

The more popular something becomes, the more stupidity it attracts.
The mainstream is where good things go to DIE.

Thing is, most people who host the fora choose to take the people pleasing route. Either because it generates income, or because they foolishly believe that more people means their message will get more influence (when it really just dilutes and distorts it.) Or both.

That means the stupidity influences the whole thing more and more.

Not only that, but when things get popular they attract people with the opposite agenda. Most are just people who disagree, but some work for various interest groups and organizations who can gain or lose things depending on people’s opinions and preferences.

This site isn’t that big. But there’s already people here who are only here to sway people’s opinion to their favour.

[Hidden]
Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

Every point you have made is a correct assessment in my opinion, but I tend to think that the costs of growth can be offset by opportunity. You never know where an Earth shattering revelation will come, nor who it will come from.

[Hidden]
Kyle (131) (@kyle) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I don’t think you’re necessarily right about it attracting stupidity and you shouldn’t treat it as such. Of course new comers might not be as well adapted to what’s going on here, but that doesn’t make them stupid. The mods, or hosts don’t seem to be on the pleasing route at all. They argue their points, they just do it with patience, as you are suppose to do with anyone that is adjusting to a new scenario.

“This site isn’t that big. But there’s already people here who are only here to sway people’s opinion to their favour.”

You couldn’t be more right about that.

[Hidden]
LeWiZa (18) (@zpeialel) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

@manimal

I’m very curious about your last two paragraphs, care to elaborate? I could imagine a lot of people would stand to lose many things regarding a shift in preference. If people started massively choosing Adidas over Nike, the Nike CEO, Mark Parker, may not get his several million dollar bonus, it may only be a couple million.

But I’d prefer to hear what you meant by your statement as opposed to my sarcastic remark.

I also agree with your statement, somewhat, but I don’t think I thought of it so pessimistically. I also don’t believe its a rule thats holds itself to be true 100 percent of the time.

[Hidden]
Marlon (97) (@shoeopener) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I agree. That’s why I don’t read the articles. The main drive in them is fear which is pretty much swaying the “HE audience” to someone’s personal benefit. Stupidity has nothing to do with it.

[Hidden]
Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I agree, in a way. I think what got us into this conundrum was the replacement of our natural sense with acquired knowledge/reason, but also the replacement of that natural sense with fear and desire compulsions, I think these have always been the issue.

That in itself sounds new-agey but what I mean is that while a lot of people do not trust their own sense, they are conditioned to believe it is inadequate and so only rely on acquired information and guidance, others become slaves to emotion because they are too stubborn to submit to acquired information and guidance, but both fail to see a third option.

Both fear/desire and knowledge/reason are tools to evaluate and apply, but most people allow one or the other to take command rather than keep both as tools for our natural sense. Our natural sense means that when we observe justice or injustice we automatically know it, but that sense can be over-riden by those tools, it can be negated because compulsion or justification can prevail over it.

The sense of justice and injustice is linked to fear and desire, we see justice as good and desire it and we see injustice as bad and so fear it, but people can often twist this natural value system because sometimes doing something harmful can grant personal pleasures or debilitate perceived threats.

Knowledge and reason are supposed to assist in designing the most efficient and relevant applications per situation, and also can assist in keeping the fear/desire compulsions in check so they do not over-ride decision making (although sometimes those compulsions can be correct initially) but not only is justice/injustice evident in observation, it is also evident in analysis and design of solution before it is applied.

[Hidden]
Cece (5) (@cmae) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

BiNGO. i am truly a newbie here and i was incredibly excited that i came across this site. Even though i’ve already come across some topics that really resonate with me, i can completely see the new agey influence around here. i sense a lot of confusion surrounding the difference between awareness and awakening, which i feel fits underneath your explanation of the imbalances.

i think that this place has great intent and i absolutely know why i’ve been exposed to it even up to this point because it is only allowing me to have more reassurance of my own position and service.

[Hidden]
Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I remember when this site came to a quality membership versus quantity membership crossroads, initially Jordan intended to go the quality route, and maybe he should have, but really that would serve an elite that would stand to stroke each others egos rather than make any real contribution to the situation of humanity.

I’m sure there are plenty of exclusionary sites that provide such a service if you can find them, but this site has an open mission that welcome the whole and the broken for complimentary progress.

[Hidden]
Ray Butler (1,423)M (@trek79) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I remember when this site came to a quality membership versus quantity membership crossroads, initially Jordan intended to go the quality route, and maybe he should have, but really that would serve an elite that would stand to stroke each others egos rather than make any real contribution to the situation of humanity.

I’m sure there are plenty of exclusionary sites that provide such a service if you can find them, but this site has an open mission that welcome the whole and the broken for complimentary progress.

[Hidden]
russki (20) (@russki) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

Being biased against New Agey people is kind of silly as it is only a label and that always leads to miscommunication.

From a purely epistemic perspective, it seems people are too quick to accept anecdotal evidence in environments with with little empirical research or something they feel strongly about. This isn’t really an issue with this site as much as an issue in general with topics that happen to be discussed on the site.

I do reluctantly agree that this site has become shallower, the blog quality has dropped significantly and Jordan is just using the popularity to push his own agenda and cash in.

It is still one of the better places/communities on the internet I have come across.

[Hidden]
LeWiZa (18) (@zpeialel) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

@russki,

If I don’t use a label, you won’t know of what I speak. As dangerous and as vague as they are, they still convey meaning. And I believe most of the people understood what was meant by it, so the meaning was conveyed. The only reason I am biased against “new age” people is because, as much as I admire them for their way of living in a new way, rebelling against the current norm, and being extremely loving, they generally tend to fail to see the benefits that have arisen from our overly rational system. For a ideology that stresses gratefulness and loving towards anything, they tend to forgot it when it comes to industrialization and other benefits of capitalism(obviously their are drawbacks to this system, but for the purpose of this post I am not addressing them). To quote a book,but not directly-The godhead exists even in the cogs of a machine, to not understand that is to not understand the godhead.

And would you be so kind as to elaborate on your second paragraph? I would very much like to hear more of your thoughts on that.

[Hidden]
Kyle (131) (@kyle) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I’ll say it in short. The sites been narrowing down it’s psychographic by the majority of the content it’s been distributing.

[Hidden]
I-Ching (2) (@IChing) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

We can’t know the Truth through the intellect or our emotions/intuition. Our senses are limited and imperfect, we cheat, we are in illusion and we make mistakes therefore whatever logical conclusions we draw from this foundation will be imperfect. Due being covered by negative emotions based on our bodily illusion our access to our intuition is also limited.

[Hidden]
Josh (213) (@reinvented2012) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

@zpeialel Why are we so quick to label? Maybe you are perceiving posts as emotional when theyre not?

[Hidden]
emptyminded (68) (@thoughtless) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

yea i realized that it was getting to such a point, but everyone thinks they are right. Tried to present a method where spirituality and science/logic could be mixed together with rationality, but it failed. so now, i just dont watch the downward spiral this site is experiencing and just click on topics i like. (like this one)

[Hidden]
YHVH (462) (@spaceghost) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

I think whatever this site turns into is it’s natural course, for “better” or “worse”

[Hidden]
Anonymous (291) (@) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

This subject has been brought up well over a dozen times over several years, and that happens with a site like highexistence. So what do we do to balance out what you feel may be too much? Do we start writing blogs that would attract the minds of those who prefer logic over intuition?

To acquire an audience that won’t be scared off by the “new agey stuff” (which I do admit sometimes is too much for me) thinkers that you are calling out for, one must start advertising knowledge in that sort of light to attract curious rational thinkers to come forth and conquer.

What I have seen to be quite common is a trolling-gang-bang upon those who think more logically & other worldly than most. We can’t slam every logical thinker, either, as we can’t slam the intuitive thinker. Some of these thinkers are extreme, and there isn’t much wrong in that – we need those extreme logic reasoners as much as we need the overly mushy intuitive to further grow in whatever the fuck it is we’re trying to understand here.

At least, that’s how I feel about that.

[Hidden]
Anonymous (328) (@) 7 years, 4 months ago ago

So then… You nostalgists better start participating more. Simple as that. Just because opinions now have more variety, that doesn’t mean a tiny group of you guys in the past ‘progressed’ better. Opinions were just simple and limited. Such is facing reality. We are talking about ‘life’ after all.

[Hidden]
Mike Wuest (510) (@mikeyw829) 5 years, 9 months ago ago

I also notice that there are a lot of people who “get it” (ambiguous, I know) who like to express their ideas in a new-agey kind of way.  I don’t understand why people do this. Like they’ll appropriate an Indian name and dress in Indian clothing, as if that somehow makes a difference.  All that does is narrow down the reach of your message to people who like to pretend they lived in India 2000 years ago. Things can be explained very practically and objectively without the airy-fairy stuff.  

Take Freud for example.  A lot of the stuff he talks about could be explained in a very new-age type way.  But he doesn’t do that.  He takes a very scientific approach.

When you understand things at a deeper level, and then you communicate it in new-agey lingo and fluff it up, the only people you are going to attract are the new-agey followers, who like to believe in fantasies because they’re afraid of life.

When you explain things in a rational, more down-to-earth way, you can reach a broader range of people. Like “normal” people, who are usually smart enough not to get absorbed into new-age fantasy.    

[Hidden]
Manimal (2,998) (@manimal) 5 years, 9 months ago ago

You make a pretty good point but… those examples are terrible.

For example, Freud was not scientific. Ask any scientific psychologist and they’ll tell you that he was a fraud and a charlatan.

Dr Fraud also came from a heavily politically and philosophically biased standpoint and prided himself in taking part in radical propaganda.

Furthermore, if you look up the good doctor’s own statements, you’ll see that he condoned pedophilia and hated white people and the western civilisation.

He’s influenced the new age movement a WHOLE LOT.

[Hidden]
Mike Wuest (510) (@mikeyw829) 5 years, 9 months ago ago

Ok I agree with you he was very deluded in a lot of ways. He created  a religion out of psychoanalysis. But the delusion was peppered with genius incites.  If you untether psychoanalysis from his belief that everything boils down to sex, there are still some really brilliant ideas. I think very few deny that he was a genius.  But his genius was distorted by his fundamentalism and dogmatic adherence to certain ideas. 

Kierkegaard, Otto Rank, Charles Eisenstein are some good ones to me.  

[Hidden]
load more